From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,e80a1497a689d8a5
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: mitch@nospam.com
Subject: Re: Ammo-zilla
Date: 1999/10/28
Message-ID: <7vaie8$2p1@drn.newsguy.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 541842865
References: <38120FAF.945ADD7D@hso.link.com> <3818bec3_4@news1.prserv.net>
Organization: home
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-10-28T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <3818bec3_4@news1.prserv.net>, "Matthew says...
 
>> The second is the syntax used in "object" declaration.  Very clumsy.
>

>Huh?
>
>procedure Do_Something is
>  I : Integer;
>begin
>
>I is an object.  What's so "clumsy" about its declaration?
>
 
I think he is talking about tagged object. 

any way, I did program in Java for more than 2 years now. And I still
prefer the functional type of programming. I prefer to think of DATA first,
then operations on DATA next. 

I like to see the structure of the data itself as the main focuse, 
then the operations on that data. So languages like Ada and pascal 
seem more natural to me, where ADT's and packages fit more
with this style of thinking.

In Java, where objects are everywhere, and where you have objects 
inside objects inside objects inside objects, for large complex 
application, I find that managing and maintaining this is harder 
than in a language where the Data itself is the center. 

I still believe in the old saying that a program = Data+Algorithms.
or may be I am just getting too old :)

mitch